Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2016 14:46:24 GMT -5
That's what I am saying there is no two context inner/outer in which you have to be certain with. There is no such thing as outer, outer only comes from the speculation because we have never seen or we have interacted with. That's the world only constructed out of mind. Do babies interact with the world without speculation? yes. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 17, 2016 14:48:17 GMT -5
I can't let you get away with that. I take no steps back. The eye is an appearance in consciousness and my experience is that the eyes see. Don't lie to me and to others gopal. Stop looking at one side of the equation and understand that both sides are the reality. Both unmanifest and manifest. Sure, but you do understand that what you experience may be an illusion, right? It means it may not be what it appears to be, right? The two statements may be contextually true, but one of them is an illusion, right? Does that unbalance the 'equation'? Are they actually equal? No you are wrong here, both statements can be true, sca is correct. Take my mirror example, reflection = appearance. The eye is an appearance in the mirror (appearance period), true. Take, it is the case that eyes see (meaning, eyes gather light and this information is sent to the brain, and consciousness sees, IOW, eyes are usually needed to facilitate seeing). You cannot demonstrate that actual physical eyes in an actual exterior world do not see their own reflection is a mirror. Or are you meaning to say, physical eyes, physical body and a mirror and reflection, of eyes, are two different contexts? This can get more complicated. When I was a kid we used to go to who I called the fast barber. You sit down in the barber chair, behind you is a mirror, in front of you is a mirror. ~You~ are ~real~, in the mirror in front, you see yourself reflected. Behind yourself, the mirror reflects the image in the mirror in front of you (yourself sitting in a barber chair), you don't even see this as your back is turned from it. However, in the mirror in front you see the reflection of the mirror in back, and of course we have all see this effect, either in person or in a picture, and "infinite" number of reflections, all are copies in the two mirrors. This always fascinated me. But the point is you have no basis to say the original (yourself) cannot exist in an exterior world. (But of course it (you) has (have) no independent existence). |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 17, 2016 14:49:04 GMT -5
That is what he's saying. No. He was refuting certain specific items. No, I think you misunderstood him. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 17, 2016 14:49:43 GMT -5
Do babies interact with the world without speculation? yes. Great. Our viewpoints converge here then. I might follow this up but not right now. |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Sept 17, 2016 14:50:43 GMT -5
It's what I don't need to be certain about; inner/outer, predetermined, received, not received, actual, illusion, true, false. inner/outer in which you have to be certain with. There is no such thing as outer, outer only comes from the speculation because we have never seen or we have interacted with. That's the world only constructed out of mind. But You often insist that all is predetermined, true, false, don't you? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2016 14:52:33 GMT -5
That's what I am saying there is no two context inner/outer in which you have to be certain with. There is no such thing as outer, outer only comes from the speculation because we have never seen or we have interacted with. That's the world only constructed out of mind. But You often insist that all is predetermined, true, false, don't you? Predetermination is a different topic. This can't be mingled with that. predetermination is true because people has been conditioned to act in a certain way would be removed when we reach clarity. |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Sept 17, 2016 15:00:09 GMT -5
Great. Our viewpoints converge here then. I might follow this up but not right now. Apparently, to the baby, music exists.  |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 17, 2016 15:02:50 GMT -5
Sure, but you do understand that what you experience may be an illusion, right? It means it may not be what it appears to be, right? The two statements may be contextually true, but one of them is an illusion, right? Does that unbalance the 'equation'? Are they actually equal? What's the difference between something experienced as an illusion and something experienced that is not an illusion? How could I tell them apart? That's everything, maybe the most pertinent question ever asked here. Everything experienced is in a sense an illusion. Assuming bodies and brains are ~real~, once a sensation enters a body, it is coded (the impression is ~turned into~ chemical and electrical coded information), meaning, it is now at least once removed from the ~real~ world. The brain/consciousness must then interpret the coded signals. So the question becomes, does the coded signal refer to some-thing illusory or something actually existing. We do this hundreds of times every day, we have to decided what's ~real~ and what's not-real. And on the spiritual journey things get much messier.... |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 17, 2016 15:04:55 GMT -5
Exactly. Satch would be the best example for that. The issue seems to be that some want to make the two contexts equal, but I say there is a hierarchy to contexts and they are not all equally true. For example, religious cults and conspiracy theorists have their own contexts that encompass their belief systems, but they are not equally valid with all other contexts. Bingo. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 17, 2016 15:05:27 GMT -5
Great. Our viewpoints converge here then. I might follow this up but not right now. Apparently, to the baby, music exists. Lol excellent. Thats pretty much still my overall car experience  |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Sept 17, 2016 15:07:35 GMT -5
Lol excellent. Thats pretty much still my overall car experience  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2016 15:09:33 GMT -5
If I were someone as rigorously logical and argumentative as you appear to be, I would appreciate someone taking the time to point out certain things to see if they were indeed indicative of something erroneous. Perhaps, at that point, with a little openness and honesty, something could then be let go of or seen in greater clarity. I don't like dredging up the past, even just two minutes ago. For me, what was said and done has no bearing on now and it actually requires a level of effort to go there. |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Sept 17, 2016 15:13:44 GMT -5
No. He was refuting certain specific items. No, I think you misunderstood him. Maybe. This is what I'm basing it on; He clearly does not include the aspects of the body that remain visibly unseen, in 'the appearance of a person.' he is taking the term 'appearance' very literally, to mean 'just specifically, the image that is visible.' My understanding of the term 'appearance' is somewhat different..... has it meaning the same as 'maya/phenomenal world/manifest, experiential' and thus, If I say that another is appearing to me, included and inherent in that appearance are all the aspects/facets understood/experienced to be part and parcel of a human. As I understand the term 'appearance', it includes all of the phenomenal, manifest world, all of experience, including, feeling sense, that which is seen, heard, experienced 'in any way, shape or form.' |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 17, 2016 15:15:09 GMT -5
Yeah I covered this in the next message. Thanks for playing. |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Sept 17, 2016 15:15:25 GMT -5
But You often insist that all is predetermined, true, false, don't you? Predetermination is a different topic. This can't be mingled with that. predetermination is true because people has been conditioned to act in a certain way would be removed when we reach clarity.That is something you have observed in your experience, correct? Would you say that predeterminism is an absolute truth? |
|
